I missed this the first time around…
Other than it being able to surface otherwise difficult to reach tiddlers, I don’t see anything masquerading as “something else”. For example, I bring up the (M) Control Panel, make a few changes and they appear in the wiki. How is that a masquerade? What am I missing?
Usually, terminology matters.
On a positive note, very clever @TW_Tones, 
@baiguai thanks for waking up this thread. Glad you like masquerade and it is one way to “surface additional or hidden content”. There are many other ways to do this, which could be a topic of its own.
@Springer this standard edition idea was to be just a little more than empty to make it a little easier for new users. I like your idea but I wonder when it changes from a standard wiki designed to replace empty and becomes a learning edition?
Great idea to set it up so the accessible components can be turned off or removed later.
@CodaCoder thanks for taking a closer look and in some ways proving the value of the masquerade, here that was its intention, as trivial as it may seem.
The tiddler with the $:/ControlPanel M is in fact the tiddler “Control Panel” masquerading as $:/ControlPanel ie pretending to be $:/ControlPanel, as it is a tiddler not a system tiddler, not a shadow tiddler, it is found by the standard search. I just added the word settings, inside Control Panel, inside hidden comments, now control panel will be also found with the search term “settings”.
Masquerade in My TiddlyWiki — standard starter edition TW v5.3.3
Masquerade elsewhere;
[Post script]
I am starting the gradual process of updating this edition, its now at 5.3.3
I did. And to be clear, I think what you’ve done here is a commendable and diligent rethinking of an issue as old as TiddlyWiki itself – namely, searching for and surfacing (partly) the inner workings. You should be proud of yourself and rightly so.
The name though, I don’t get it. it’s not a masquerade. It doesn’t hide anything, it doesn’t mask anything (and, as one dictionary definition has it) it doesn’t make a fiction of anything or present a “false outward show”. What it does is REpresent things.
No, sorry, I don’t have a better name 
Can I live with it? Sure. Though I might need to file it under “pet peeves” 
It you go to the “masquerade ball” you may look like the “queen of Sheba” but it is just you, a regular person (or tiddler), you were masquerading as the “Queen of Sheba”, you are not the actual “Queen of sheba”.
So I think it does everything you said it does not;
Does this change your perspective @CodaCoder ?
Like I said, I can live with it. I don’t have anything to add. 
I’m sure this has been brought up ad nauseam, but I think one of the biggest impediments to adopting TW is the look of it. It looks like it is from the old days of the internet.
The newer comparable products are very slick looking and, for better or worse, that is attractive to new users no matter what the potential is under the hood. If it looks out of date, people won’t even try it.
The notebook theme goes a long way to remedy this situation (and it works on mobile) so I would recommend that be the theme for any starter edition (or something like it). In fact, I might go so far as to say make it look good first, then add in the other fancy features. Kinda backwards I suppose, but I think it would help get people in the door.
I understand where you are coming from, but I think for a basic starter edition we should not do something drastically different from the default.
Using this method we still only maintain one standard edition, I propose this to supersede empty.html, whilst retaining empty.html for experienced users to build wikis from the ground up.
This is my main contention. Empty is too empty for new users. It serves it purpose but it is a brutal first wiki, for new users, it does not even have;
But then we can present a few alternative layouts/views to attract different users based on aesthetics.
Slightly off-topic, but does anyone maintain the Notebook theme currently? If not, has anyone considered adopting it? (Here in github it looks abandoned.)
I’m wondering, is it still fully functional with the latest versions of TiddlyWiki? Perhaps theming in TiddlyWiki is stable enough that it doesn’t need much maintenance. What do you think?
FWIW I do think it’s really high quality and it would be worthwhile keeping the project alive.
I’m pretty sure that it has been abandoned, that the author is no longer involved in the TW community. It would be great for someone who knows something about theming to pick it up.
I haven’t tried it with 5.3.3, but when I did try it with 5.3.1, it seemed to function perfectly.
I agree. I wish I could volunteer, but not only are my skill-sets not a good fit, I also have seemed to over-committed myself lately.